-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 According to Ondřej Vašík on 3/13/2008 3:29 AM: | Hello,
Hello Ondřej, and adding coreutils (as the biggest client of the long-options module), | In RedHat Bugzilla #431005 I got complain about funny error messages in | some coreutils commands when using more than one long option. That leads | to funny error messages. e.g. "sleep --help --version" command will | result to error | "sleep: unrecognized option `--help' | Try `sleep --help' for more information." | I don't see any reason why to parse only one long option. Certain of the coreutils MUST special-case option parsing, in order to more fully comply with POSIX. For example, /bin/[ takes exactly one option, so that '/bin/[ --help ]' obeys the POSIX rules for testing that - --help is a non-empty string rather than outputting help. Therefore, '/bin/[ --help --version' must complain about a syntax error. But for most of the coreutils, it appears that the function parse_long_options could be made a bit nicer in the presence of multiple long options. Your example of 'sleep --help --version' printing usage output seems reasonable. The question now is whether unilaterally changing parse_long_options() to no longer enforce argc==2 would break any of the coreutils that intentionally rely on that behavior for POSIX compliance. Maybe the compromise would be changing the signature of parse_long_options to take an additional flag on whether argc must be 2 or can be longer. | I think that is safe to allow unlimited number of long options and break | after first success like is done in other coreutils utilities. Therefore | used attached patch in Fedora RAWHIDE. What do you think about that | approach? In the future, please send patches in a MIME format that allows inline reading. I'm lazy enough that I don't like saving attachments to disk just to review them. - -- Don't work too hard, make some time for fun as well! Eric Blake [EMAIL PROTECTED] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (Cygwin) Comment: Public key at home.comcast.net/~ericblake/eblake.gpg Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iEYEARECAAYFAkfZHOYACgkQ84KuGfSFAYDJNQCfbR10rSlLj3TXDDBH7JkLYT+/ 9JkAn0qIDR7CcAhXsnTvXcwocBj6ttQs =0R07 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ Bug-coreutils mailing list Bug-coreutils@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-coreutils
